nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

NBP part II

oscarBravo

The old NBP thread had hit the 10,000-post threshold that makes the boards.ie hamsters cry, so here's a shiny new one.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

user1842

I really worry if Imagine say they can serve over 100,000 premises even though in reality they cant (by quoting their off peak speeds).

How will the department know they are lying?

Orebro

And I would guess that most of the texts were coming from people sitting in their kitchens having breakfast, with their lovely fibre routers blinking away near them in the hall.

rodge123

plodder wrote: »

The wireless brigade were up early this morning texting all the usual nonsense into Newstalk's Broadband vox pop. Li-fi is the next greatest thing on the way to replace fibre apparently :rolleyes:

I had to switch station before I crashed into someone driving to work, listening to the braindead texts in as well as one of the presenters was not a healthy way to start a Monday morning!

ednwireland

plodder wrote: »

The wireless brigade were up early this morning texting all the usual nonsense into Newstalk's Broadband vox pop. Li-fi is the next greatest thing on the way to replace fibre apparently :rolleyes:

the same wireless brigade that cant provide me with broadband despite "covering" My area

allanpkr

plodder wrote: »

The wireless brigade were up early this morning texting all the usual nonsense into Newstalk's Broadband vox pop. Li-fi is the next greatest thing on the way to replace fibre apparently :rolleyes:

lifi lol , damn desparation it seems..more talk like that and they will convince everyone ftth is only answer. which any intelligent person knows it is.

plodder

The wireless brigade were up early this morning texting all the usual nonsense into Newstalk's Broadband vox pop. Li-fi is the next greatest thing on the way to replace fibre apparently :rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

All we need now is for Openeir to make an announcement that they intend to roll their rural fibre network to all premises in the state not previously covered.

That would be more believeable than what is coming from Wisps.
Openeir have a track record of doing a roll out.
State aid cannot be made available where a commercial entity has stated plans to service the area.

They would probably be in a position to do it quicker than the NBP too!

I'd honestly take that then leaving ****ing "but we already provide up to 150mbps with our magical 5G oh wait sorry it's 9PM on a Friday???" to not do it or just barely meet requirements now then **** us over later like we had with Three last time.

[Deleted User]

I still want to know how any of these WISPs meets the criteria because they certainly ****ing don't where I live and is the case for many other people. They only get removed from the map if they 1) are currently being met by a consistent 30/6 connection or 2) the ISP commits to meeting that target like Eir did. Neither is going to happen with the WISPs so can we stop ****ing feeding them.

allanpkr

let us not be unrealistic , thr providers are going to be wisps..satelite lol no..one but no..one is taking that as read.seriously? at end of day lets say the wisps win a case ...lol.. so a customer is paying same price as his next door . who has ftth speeds in a few yrs wont match...how long before a fibre company comes along to soak up the rest of homes when wisps cannot match data needed in future which will be very high. a little realism here guys. customers will drive the market.

Marlow

Ultimanemo wrote: »

Why WISPS are trying to stop The NBP?, because they know they can't compete with it, because they know their service is far inferior to FTTH.

It's not the WISPs trying to stop the NBP. It is the operators affected (all of them ... disregardless of tech) providing the department with data based on their request for said data.

Once that data is provided, the department can not ignore it. It is now public knowledge.

And the department clearly has underestimated how incomplete their data set was. Which is something that has resulted from their ignorance and lack of interaction with the registered providers in the country in the first place.

Had they been on top of that .. and had they not made a mess of it .. none of this would have come to light.

I see this as a good thing. This countries telecoms policies are still very much "Dial-Up Dempsey" style. It's actually regional providers that have remedied a lot of that on their own .. just doing it instead of dealing with the department.

And yes .. if the call for data comes .. and they feel themselves threatened .. they will actually make an effort to supply the data. They might not have done that before. The department then is forced to take action in regards to that data.

/M

Ultimanemo

Orebro wrote: »

God the WISP industry has to be one of the most hateful ever created in this country. Hopefully the minister and Broadband Ireland sign the contract this week and put the WISP business on notice.

Why WISPS are trying to stop The NBP?, because they know they can't compete with it, because they know their service is far inferior to FTTH.

Marlow

Sorry, but apart from the article referring to 137k premises, that seemingly have been pointed out by the sources of the article being able to be covered by wireless operators, the article does not refer to WISPs.

It refers to "other providers". Ireland has providers on quite a few different technologies: FTTH, copper phone lines, cable-tv .. even satellite. Just to mention a few.

Of these providers, there are a multitude, that provide using on more than one media. A few regional providers even operate their own FTTH networks, even though in small scale.

So the WISP bashing here continues, without even knowing who was interviewed and basically throwing all alternative providers in the same bin .. without even knowing anything about them.

It's even clear from numbers of wireless operators that are registered with Comreg and numbers, that we've been told that submitted on the last call of data, that only approx half or less of the operators active in the country submitted data in this round.

I find that absolutely hilarious, because: the NBP is a tender, that will spend state aid .. both irish and european tax money.

This requires said tender to be as objective and complete within the realm of the tender outline as possible. If it gets mismanaged (which is has .. more than once), then it fires back.

So this has nothing to do with the industry. This actually has to do with the department and how they've ran the show. That's where the blame is to be put.

If they had kept it objective and complete, they wouldn't have to postpone the signing of the contract time after time.

This has even be proven, where Varadkar (representing the department) blamed Imagine for a delay, when in reality Imagine and other providers just responded for a call for data initiated by the department. And that bluff was called. So the delay was not caused by the industry. It was caused by the unpreparedness of the department for what they had incoming on their own request.

And I'm honestly not shocked, when the industry fights back given the departments track record to these tenders in the past. Just look at how the NBS worked out. That was also state aid spend competing with existing providers on the ground, providing speeds lower than what the existing providers charged most of the time. They just sat still then and waited it out, because it was 100% clear that it wasn't going to last long before it failed.

The choice of the current round with the infrastructure being handed to the operator at the end of the contract (may it or may it not be anything worth by then) also shows the departments lack of learning with eircom/telecom eireann. Because that one worked out well, too .... NOT.

/M

theguzman

Orebro wrote: »

God the WISP industry has to be one of the most hateful ever created in this country. Hopefully the minister and Broadband Ireland sign the contract this week and put the WISP business on notice.

They are reacting like the Monopoly they are.

Orebro

God the WISP industry has to be one of the most hateful ever created in this country. Hopefully the minister and Broadband Ireland sign the contract this week and put the WISP business on notice.

allanpkr

yadda yadda yadda why dont we just wait and see?

Johnboy1951

All we need now is for Openeir to make an announcement that they intend to roll their rural fibre network to all premises in the state not previously covered.

That would be more believeable than what is coming from Wisps.
Openeir have a track record of doing a roll out.
State aid cannot be made available where a commercial entity has stated plans to service the area.

They would probably be in a position to do it quicker than the NBP too!

Marlow

Marlow wrote: »

Not sure, who they interviewed, but it is exactly what I predicted. And it is happening, because the Department mismanaged the entire process.

clohamon wrote: »

Do you know if the challenge will be made in the form of a State aid complaint to the European Commission? Or will it be made in the Irish courts?

Are the challengers using or planning to use licensed spectrum?

Sorry .. I am not telepathic ... and as you can see, from my post, I am not even sure, who they interviewed there.

How would you come to the conclusion, that ... if I don't know, who they interviewed ... that I know what route these companies are taking? I'm just saying, that there is an indication of it happening and yes .. it will be more than likely to the European Commission, because the Department has no interest in following up on said complaints ... it goes against them.

As I stated, even OpenEIR had to bring the 300k to european level, before the department interacted with them on that. The department obviously tried to paint a different picture afterwards.

/M

clohamon

Marlow wrote: »

State aid rules is an entire different matter here.

/M

Do you know if the challenge will be made in the form of a State aid complaint to the European Commission? Or will it be made in the Irish courts?

Are the challengers using or planning to use licensed spectrum?

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

In sub 12 of the link i have shared it clearly outlines why wireless can't keep at pace with ftth. It also states that it must be future proof with speeds of 1gb been provided to some resident in the mid 2020. Kidda guess we have already passed the above sentence in certain parts of the country.

Key words here are future proof and 1gb

The future proof requirement is to avail of the money provided by the contract to cover the premises, that have no service as described as per the original tender. Correct.

It can not be made a requirement for infrastructure, that is not part of the tender and in place or planned for and notified to the department before the contracts are signed. So that does not negate the fact, that said state aid money can not be paid out for premises who already have service within the requirements of the original tender.

If it could be made a requirement, then you would have to include all of OpenEIR VDSL AND Virgins rollout in the tender again. Most of that is not future proof. OpenEIR has actually pre-empted that with their IFN rollout .. but that will still leave about 100k premises on VDSL, that are not part of the NBP at this point of time.

You can't have it one way. Either you include it all, if you want it to that level .. or you go by the original tender specifications, that cover all the infrastructure left out in the first place.

State aid rules is an entire different matter here.

/M

Gary kk

In sub 12 of the link i have shared it clearly outlines why wireless can't keep at pace with ftth. It also states that it must be future proof with speeds of 1gb been provided to some resident in the mid 2020. Kidda guess we have already passed the above sentence in certain parts of the country.

Key words here are future proof and 1gb

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

Oh and what would you say the the final result of the the tech reports was.

You are ignoring various things here:

- there is the tender. The tender specifies, what is called for (30 Mbit/s now and 100 Mbit/s later).

- there is the tender process in which the participants negotiate with the department of what contract, they are arriving at. Part of that are the documents, that you pointed at. And yes, the participants of the tender have to incorporate that into their bid. And even wireless operators were part of that initially.

- there then is the bid of the final tender participants.

However ... state aid is a different matter. State aid can only be applied, where no service already is applied, that meets the original tender requirements.

And only the original tender requirements can be considered for this requirement, because the provider of the service may not have been part of the tender, thus not subject to subsequent negotiations.

That is why no state aid can be given for premises, that already have service meeting the original tender requirements.

It's state aid and tender rules. You can not bend them as you see fit.

/M

Gary kk

Marlow wrote: »

Those are tech reports. Recommendations. Not requirements. Which have been taken into consideration during the tender process. However, they do not invalidate existing and planned infrastructure commissioned during the tender process. Infrastructure, which has to be accounted for, when state aid is applied.

That is what the call for data from the department recently was for. And that is what has backfired now, because the department underestimated, how much they had not accounted for. Not the operators fault. More of the departments fault.

/M

Oh and what would you say the the final result of the the tech reports was.

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/communications/topics/Broadband/national-broadband-plan/Pages/Key-Procurement-Documents--.aspx

Go to number 13.

Sorry and 12

Those are tech reports. Recommendations. Not requirements. Which have been taken into consideration during the tender process. However, they do not invalidate existing and planned infrastructure commissioned during the tender process. Infrastructure, which has to be accounted for, when state aid is applied.

That is what the call for data from the department recently was for. And that is what has backfired now, because the department underestimated, how much they had not accounted for. Not the operators fault. More the departments fault.

/M

Gary kk

https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/communications/topics/Broadband/national-broadband-plan/Pages/Key-Procurement-Documents--.aspx

Go to number 13.

Sorry and 12

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

Was it not determined at the start that it had to be fiber

If it had to be fiber as a requirement, then they couldn't even roll out the last 5-10% in wireless. It would be a violation of the tender.

Also, if you made the requirement of it being fiber, then you would also not be able to consider Virgins rollout and OpenEIRs FTTC rollout and would have to include those premises in the tender, too.

It was aimed at a fiber solution as much as possible. But it could not be specified as a requirement.

/M

Gary kk

Was it not determined at the start that it had to be fiber

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

I guess if one would choose to demand a change in the tech then the other could demand a change in the min requirements

If you change the minimum requirements in a tender, you have to restart said tender from scratch and open it for invitation again.

/M

Gary kk

I guess if one would choose to demand a change in the tech then the other could demand a change in the min requirements

Marlow

Gary kk wrote: »

Can't see the EU given any thing to the wisp. Sure they might delay the process. Pretty sure it was determined at the start it would have to be fiber. As far as i know wireless is not fiber.

It's not about the EU giving anything to WISPs. It is about, that state aid can not be provided for premises, that are covered by a provider (any provider, disregardless of distribution tech) meeting the criteria. Being part of the tender or not.

This is not about getting money. This is about legally not being able to fund competition to existing providers, that meet the criteria. Something the department blatantly has ignored. Even OpenEIR had to bring the 300k to EU level, before the department took that investment into account and removed the premises.

/M

Marlow

Pique wrote: »

But as they didn't enter the tendering process, and the tendering process has long since closed, and they largely aren't capable of meeting those speeds even now, years after the tender was opened, especially not to every one of their customers with any semblance of consistency, how can a challenge be taken seriously?

They didn't have to participate in the tender process.

If we went by your logic, Virgin, SIRO and OpenEIR could also not challenge the tender process or premises there in, as they never were or opted to leave the tender process.

If a provider provides broadband meeting the tender requirements, then this has to be taken into account by the tender process. At least up to the point, where the contract is actually signed. As long as the contract is not signed, all changes in technology have to be factored in.

/M